( 1 ) THIS is a wife s appeal against the order passed by Shri RC Jain, District Judge, Delhi on 23rd March, 1984. The Additional District Judge has dissolved the marriage between the parties by granting divorce under Section 13 (1) (ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter called the Act ). The Additional District Judge has left the parties to bear their own costs.

( 2 ) THE marriage between the parties was performed according to the Hindu rites at Ajmer, Rajasthan on 17-8-1949.

( 3 ) A son, named Kalyan was born to the parties on 21-9-51.

( 4 ) IT is stated in the petition filed by the respondent-husband that in the year 1951. he was sponsored by the University of Bombay to go to London. Before going to London, he requested the wife to accompany him to London, but she refused to do so. It was stated that the husband returned, after his visit to London, at the end of October, 1953 and on his return, he found the behaviour of the wife to be cruel and not submissive ; and that the wife was always abusing the husband and his parents etc. and that the threatened the husband with dire consequences; and has got the respondent beaten through her relations.

( 5 ) THE husband stated in the petition that in the year 1953 the respondent left the matrimonial home without any reason whatsoever and came back. and rejoined the husband in. the year 1955. tlt. ,is also stated in the petition that the wife left the matrimonial home on 29th September, 1975 and that since then she had not joined the petitioner. The husband also asserted that the wife used to abuse the petitioner and his parents in filthy language, which caused mental-tension to the husband. on. account of wife s misconduct, and that the husband thus suffered mental cruelty at her handg.

( 6 ) THE original petition was filed, by the respondent in the appeal, on 24-11-1977. In this petition there were two respondents. One, the appellant, and the other Shri Jethanand In the original petition the petitioner had made allegations of an illicit relationship between respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 2 in paragraphs 5 to 9 read together.

( 7 ) THE original written statement filed by the appellant was dated 18-7-1978, wherein the assertions of illicit connection between her and Jethanand were traversed, and it was asserted that the respondent petitioner himielf has stated in the petition that Jethanand was like a father to the respondent.

( 8 ) REPLICATION was filed by the petitioner on 4-9-1978.

( 9 ) ON pleading of the parties, following four issues were framed on 21-2-1979 :-

1. Whether the parties last resided together at Delhi and thus this court has jurisdiction to try this petition ? 299 2. If issue No. I is proved, whether the respondent has treated the petitioner with cruelly ? O P 3. Whether the respondent has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition ? OP 4. Relief. Thereafter the parties led their evidence.

( 10 ) AFTER the evidence bad been closed, an application was moved for amendment of the petition by the respondent on 2-2-1984. That amendment was allowed on 14-2-84 By this amended petition allegations of illicit connection between respondent No. I and Jethanand in original petition paragraphs 5 and 9, were eliminated. Amended written statement was filed by respondent No. 1 on 21-2-1984.

( 11 ) IN the amended written statement the wife denied the allegations of cruelty and desertion made against her. She also denied that she ever abused the husband but asserted that "it was the behaviour of the petitioner towards the respondent was most objectionable and cruel which on the contrary created mental tensions in the mind of the respondent, that the petitioner s father had expired before the marriage of the petitioner and the mother of the petitioner rarely lived with the petitioner so all the allegations in this regard are malicious and malafide. On the contrary attitud